This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: Obama to send 3,000 troops to Ebola danger zone

We have 1,700 troops in Iraq right now fmw, not the 300 you incorrectly stated.
And the GOP wants 10,000 to 15,000 more, knowing the American people oppose this .

Originally Posted by fmw

Let's see. We'll send 3000 troops to West Africa and hope they don't get sick and die. We'll send 300 to Iraq and hope they don't get shot and die. I thought the purpose of the military is to kill people and break things. Who do we want to kill and what do we want to break in West Africa?

Re: Obama to send 3,000 troops to Ebola danger zone

And to think even Charles Krauthammer effusely praised the President for what he did today.
Specifically stating that only our military could do this.
And Speaker Boehner still had to make a snide remark about how long it took the President,
forgetting the quarter billion we've already spent .

Originally Posted by Visbek

Yet more partisan nonsense connected to a terrible disease. Thanks.

Basically, yes. Since you can't keep track of your own words, in post #14 you said "How about those Humanitarians in Africa and the surrounding countries go and build a hospital. Didn't the UN say this was already out of control?" Later, you insisted that Europe get involved. None of that suggests the US should step up its efforts.

I was responding to post #14. You suggested we send CDC instead in post #19. After taking yet another partisan crack at the President.

We should also note that the CDC does not have the capability to build mobile hospitals. There is no "Centers of Disease Control Army of Engineers."

The CDC is already involved. They have around 55 staffers there, and another 350 in the US working on the issue.

The military is going to coordinate, to build facilities, and to train up to 500 health care workers per week. This includes ACE and medical teams. I really don't see why you're complaining about this, other than "Obama issued an order."

The international response has not been as strong as it should be, of that there is little question. That does not mean the US should refrain from utilizing the appropriate resources to help fight Ebola.

Re: Obama to send 3,000 troops to Ebola danger zone

Originally Posted by Visbek

Yet more partisan nonsense connected to a terrible disease. Thanks.

Basically, yes. Since you can't keep track of your own words, in post #14 you said "How about those Humanitarians in Africa and the surrounding countries go and build a hospital. Didn't the UN say this was already out of control?" Later, you insisted that Europe get involved. None of that suggests the US should step up its efforts.

I was responding to post #14. You suggested we send CDC instead in post #19. After taking yet another partisan crack at the President.

We should also note that the CDC does not have the capability to build mobile hospitals. There is no "Centers of Disease Control Army of Engineers."

The CDC is already involved. They have around 55 staffers there, and another 350 in the US working on the issue.

The military is going to coordinate, to build facilities, and to train up to 500 health care workers per week. This includes ACE and medical teams. I really don't see why you're complaining about this, other than "Obama issued an order."

The international response has not been as strong as it should be, of that there is little question. That does not mean the US should refrain from utilizing the appropriate resources to help fight Ebola.

Has nothing to do with partisanship, other than Americans not only being the one counted on to do something to make a difference. Seems only you would know about such being a disease.....are you a carrier?

Even quoting me you went completely out of context. Nothing I said was even remotely close saying we should do nothing. It did point out about those who knew it was already out of hand and they were doing nothing to lead any efforts. Meaning they did not step up any efforts. Even though there were some calling for more assistance and help. But then this goes back to that issue of you trying to think for another rather than ask one what they mean.

Well that was the way the thread read out. That's why the responses are numbered. Yes the CDC were working on the issue when they sent the Docs back that caught the disease.

Yes I am ex military and know all about such procedures. Oh and like I said.....none of this money was thought of when BO threw his Hat into the Ring. Which is why some now are saying to Put an Appropriations Bill On Reid's Desk With the headline in Crayon so he can't say he didn't see it.

That's good with others all looking to help ..... especially since they now know, its more out of hand than what was reported. Probably the reason why BO said so and that we were late in responding. Like those others I was talking about.

Re: Obama to send 3,000 troops to Ebola danger zone

Originally Posted by humbolt

Oh, I think it's a freaking mess over there. If there's honestly a chance the military can help, I'm all for it. I question the use of the military in such a fashion, but I won't go to the wall if that's the best we can do. I do worry about the result, but I just can't second guess the administration here. Ebola isn't a joke, and if we can contain it, we should.

It is.....a lot of the people know what happens if they say they or a family member has Ebola. Many are trying to say they have the other major problem down there. That being Malaria. So they wont be quarantined. One can look at the numbers and see why it needs to be contained. Plus things are getting chaotic so with the Military going in.....there will be Order. People wont just be allowed to leave and take the disease with them. Incubation being 2-21 days.

The W.H.O. was calling for 12 clinics to be set up. Then 17.....now they want 24.

Re: Obama to send 3,000 troops to Ebola danger zone

Originally Posted by Erod

We didn't seem to care when the Sudanese were being slaughtered by the thousands.

By Ebola?

"He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
"Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS. #MAGA

Re: Obama to send 3,000 troops to Ebola danger zone

Originally Posted by vesper

I don't understand why it is the U.S. military that is being used for this mission and not one U.N. Peacekeeper.

I think it has to do more with politics than actually anything else. Obama is turning up the rhetoric on an issue that has bi-partisan support - so he sends US troops to show how much of a "leader" he is. Rather cynically but also probably close to the truth - this is meant to help mid-terms - whether or not that is the primary driver of this... cynically I'd suspect it is, realistically it might just be a happy side effect.